Why knocking is so important.

[FlowingFlame]

All Bolds are mine.

Edit: Fixed Link.

Not only did I assume this i demonstrated it.

Because Kusa's Atheism like your own Atheism is caused by the lack of evidence of what you thought God was.

Given that I've yet to say the reasons for my non-belief you're simply pulling assumptions out of your ass. You're overgeneralizing of a group who, by its very nature, are disconnected by their own personal cause and reason is astounding. Or at least it would be if it didn't happen so often.

Now the only other option was that your belief was correct and you both received 'Proof' of God in the way of the Holy Spirit, and you simply turned you back on Him anyway. If this happened then that makes you a misotheist and not an atheist. Which is why i prefaced my arguement with "Your Atheism is caused by..."

Other options:
1. God doesn't exist and you're interpreting a book of bronze age myths, many of them stolen from older myths, as truth.
2. Mistranslations/destroyed books/missing manuscripts have skewed the actual messages to be so incorrect as to be useless.
3. God predeterminately hardened my heart. Romans 9 comes to mind.
4. The so called "Proof of God" hasn't come yet.

And it can go on and on.

Also, assumption upon assumption. You assume I ever held an actual beliefs. You assume I require proof as a foundation for believing. You assume I ever received anything to begin with to turn my back on. It wasn't an argument, it was blind assertion based on preconceptions about Atheists.

But hey, for shits and giggles let's say the Holy Spirit gave me Proof of God and I turned my back on it. Wouldn't that be a failure on the part of the message if it wasn't enough for me at that point in my life to accept it? Shouldn't God know I would find some aspect of it disagreeable to the point of rebellion? I would posit that whatever God's message it must be pretty lousy if even Angels, beings created perfect, IN paradise, face to face with God chose to rebel against him.

-or- I just whiped you with some good ole fashion logic and reasoning.

Are you fucking kidding me? Logic and Reasoning =\= Making up your opponents view for them and then making sweeping assumptions about an infinitely diverse group of people. All you've done is shown yourself to be a bit of an arrogant prick that assumes he knows all the answers. That in itself is bad form but you also failed to address my point. There are 41,000+ denominations of Christianity and many of them can and do disagree with you. Your 'whipping' technique is laughable.

Again basic logic and reasoning..
My primary parameter in what you quoted, was "that we are to seek God as presented in the bible."

God being a Father would immediately disqualify the lesbian theory. Secondly if we are using the bible as a guidline God has identified homosexuality as a sin. God is sinless therefore again God can not qualify as a lesbian.

If God can't turn into a woman than he isn't all powerful. Hell, I find a being with the powers described of It having a gender at all to be hilarious and it simply smacks of Bronze Age tribesman logic.

Also, does It's "mysterious ways" have limits or something? Basic logic and reasoning would say that an All Powerful being can do anything.

Two reasons come to mind right away Psalm 23 more over the bit where "God leads us not into temptation and He delivers us from evil.." and the Story of the prodigal son/gay daughter (in this case.) In the story the father did not take the son and show him how the best ways to party. He simply let Him go to do what suited him, and waited for his return.

If your gay it's because that is what suits you. when you want to return home then know your Father has made perperations for you to be able to do that.

I disagree with this in multiple ways.

Firstly, Adam and Eve. Put a young child in a room with a box and tell them not to look at what's inside it and then leave the room. The vast majority of the time they're going to look in the box because you created the idea that there was something interesting inside it. This is temptation. Substitute the Tree of Knowledge (Stupidly, the one thing they would need to know what they were doing is wrong in the first place) and voila, God providing temptation. If you want to say it was the Serpent that did the tempting then God either:

A) Let it happen. in which case he's not all loving because he cursed us all for it.
B) Couldn't stop it from happening. In which case he's neither all powerful or all loving because he cursed us all for it.
C) Didn't know it was happening. (He does lose track of Adam in the Garden at one point so...) In which case he lacks all three divine properties.

Second way I disagree is that I was born like this. I have never desired a man physically or emotionally, and even more telling is that the smell of a man's sweat, despite years of prolonged exposure at work, makes me sick to my stomach. Not being metaphorical here, it literally makes me feel ill. Even if I did "want to come home" as you so eloquently put 'bang dudes', I simply could not and to force myself to do so would be my literal Hell on Earth.

I'm definitely not gay because it suits me, Lesbianism IS my normal and I've seen Christian interpretations of these so called "preparations" for this like "pray the gay away" clinics that lead many people, especially teenagers, to deeper depression and suicide.

Again, there are tons of Christians that have completely different views than you.

Actually no. I was brought up into thinking God hates fags, I had to change that thought, move from what was comfortable to me and embrace what the bible actually says God says about homosexuals.

That it is a sexual sin like anyother and needs the same forgiveness that I myself needed. I wanted their to be a great gulf between my sins and that of the 'gays.' I found out their wasn't.

So no. God was not who i wanted Him to be.

Honestly, good for you. Takes a lot of open mindedness to take steps like that. Hell, a lot of Christians would regard that as a slippery slope to a sinful life. Now just take a few more steps and it'll be even better. ^_^

maybe you could be more antisemetic and ask why God did not help the germans wipe them out all together.

Dodging the point I was making. God was tearing shit up all the time, now all we get is the occasional appearance on toast or a leaky wall or some other thing that can always be attributed to chance.

You do not seem to be aware of what the book of Judges is about.
Everything in Judges 1&2 is about the punishment of Israel. Both book catalog a cycle of sin, punishment in the way of God handing the jews over to their enemies, the jews repenting, God delivering them, and the process repeating over and over each time getting worse and worse.

So an example in Judges 1 would be an example of God handing the jews over to their enemies.

Who is to say this is not happening now?

Again assuming everybody interprets every book of the bible the same... which they obviously don't given the 41,000+ denominations of Christianity. Are you telling me that I can't read a passage stating that God took part in battle (whether in person or in spirit) and lost to superior weaponry and read it for what it is? Given that I think the Bible was written by and for Bronze Age tribesman it makes perfect sense to me that a highly advanced weapon would instill this kind of response in the writer.

The idea of people "Seeking the God of the Bible, whatever the outcome." seems to go out the window if it doesn't agree with your specific point of view. I seek, I find only old stories written by barbarians with little understanding of the world and universe.

Again prodigal son. When a rebellious son wants to leave God let him go. If you think God should act differently, then perhaps this is where your house built on the sand has failed you and the reason why you do not see or hear from God.

Or perhaps God never existed in the first place and the stories are just stories. Given that I can prove huge chunks of the bible as factually inaccurate with simply science and study of history...

There are many many happenings that can not be explained, so rather than give God any credit they are explained as anomalies or 'mutations.'

Or as so called miracles which many, many, MANY Christians love to point to as evidence of the Divine. Hence my point. If God was actually sending them then his production values have shrunk immensely.

For the Bible based Christian it is not the reward. Heaven for the Bible Based Christian is simply a venue, where our most precious commodities are common place building materials. Your think of catholisim or Muslim beliefs in the after life.

No True Scotsman!

Bold should read "My incredibly specific set of beliefs based on my personal interpretations of the Bible" You assume all Christians who base their faith in the Bible are like you and you couldn't be more wrong. Like I said, 41,000+ different denominations, many of which condemn many of the others.

Also, if you think every single solitary "Bible based Christian" isn't motivated by reward then you just don't know people.

ooo, goodie I likes it when use guys gets froggy and what to play with scripture.

Feeling's mutual. There's always a book or verse that contradicts what's being said.

Again for the bible based Christian the reward is not the goal. I did not say we weren't getting anything. For the Muslim paradise/heaven is the end goal. For the Christian Heaven is simply a venue where our most precious things are common place. This means what we hold up as precious is meaningless. This implies that what we have enstore far exceeds anything we can currently imagine. What good is a reward to you now can not pathom? So then the reward becomes a secondary measure to what we have been assured of. A Relationship with God.

In which case separating the two, venue (heaven) and reward (relationship with God), is just an arbitrary action in order to put you on a pedestal above other religions and one of the worst cases of Special Pleading I've ever seen. You're damn well doing it for a reward, you just think yours is special. This desperation to elevate yourself above other faiths is so petty and lacking in humility that it's honestly disappointing.

Can you even accept that the 'reward' other people spend their entire life seeking means just as much to them as yours does to you? I'm honestly asking here!

Because I dont have a problem with sending unbelievers to Hell. For them it is better than their alternitive. It is a point of mercy.

Personally I don't think people deserve to be TORTURED FOREVER for disagreeing with me. Even more so if the method I used to try and convince them was an ancient collection of Bronze Age myths, riddled with easily disprovable facts and events, delivered by groups of people so mired with greed, corruption, and petty hate for one another that they often appear so much worse than the people they condemn.

Sadly, I don't think we can be friends because of this. I've seen an ugliness in you through this group of responses. A petty and vindictive nature that has been absent from the decent Christians I've befriended throughout my life. Altogether disappointing.

[Lucanus]

Drich, some pages ago you wrote that you don't think the Bible is infallible. Yet, how can your knowledge of god be regarded as correct if the bible is not infallible? Also since you proclaim yourself to be a "Bible-believing Christian"®?

Even ASKing is something you ultimately get from the Bible. Where is the objective proof that Luke 11 is one of the good parts and not one of the fallible ones? If you say that's because you ASKed and he delivered,well that's not going to be objective evidence as ASKing only takes place in your mind. You ARE going to be subject to confirmation bias; after all you're a human too.

[Lucanus]

EDIT: double post

Shitty connection

[Drich]

I look forward to answering tomorrow.

Bday party weekend

[Thumpalumpacus]

Fuckin' A, Stockholm Syndrome sucks.

[Goosebump]

Hi, I'm new.

Just read this entire thread, exhausting. I was wondering if any one else noticed that Drich seems to take sport in this. From the smug one liners and liberal use of emoticons it appears to be entertaining him. Anyone else get this impression?

[ShaMan]

[Lucanus]

Hi, I'm new.

Welcome why don't you post a thread in the introduction forum so we can all get to know you?

Just read this entire thread, exhausting. I was wondering if any one else noticed that Drich seems to take sport in this. From the smug one liners and liberal use of emoticons it appears to be entertaining him. Anyone else get this impression?

I've seen he has a fairly approach to discussion. It's borderline trollish sometimes.

MFW I clicked "last post" and it wasn't Drich

[Drich]

Given that I've yet to say the reasons for my non-belief you're simply pulling assumptions out of your ass. You're overgeneralizing of a group who, by its very nature, are disconnected by their own personal cause and reason is astounding. Or at least it would be if it didn't happen so often.

Whatever your (groups) reasons they can and will fall into one of the two catagories I have already mentioned. One you have found God and you have turned your back on Him. (Which if He has and you do it, makes you a misotheist and not an Atheist.) Or two you have a unsupported view of God and your faith has failed due whatever the flavor of rain God sent down on you cause your to doubt the viablity of your personal version of God. thus making you a legitmate atheist.

Other options:
1. God doesn't exist and you're interpreting a book of bronze age myths, many of them stolen from older myths, as truth.

Which is indeed covered by option 2. In that as you understand God, your understanding (bronze age myth, all loving grand father or warrior meanie) does not exist, and has found no support by God.

2. Mistranslations/destroyed books/missing manuscripts have skewed the actual messages to be so incorrect as to be useless.

Again falls under the catagory of no support.

3. God predeterminately hardened my heart. Romans 9 comes to mind.

No support/No proof.

4. The so called "Proof of God" hasn't come yet.

You have no support because you have yet to seek God on His terms.

And it can go on and on.

Indeed. I can copy and paste 'no support/No proof' as long as you like as well.

Also, assumption upon assumption. You assume I ever held an actual beliefs. You assume I require proof as a foundation for believing. You assume I ever received anything to begin with to turn my back on. It wasn't an argument, it was blind assertion based on preconceptions about Atheists.

And assumed rightly.
Or are you saying You do not require proof of anything in order to believe? If this were true your first statement can not be. Your third statement is incorrect as i did not assume that. i gave an option as in If not A then B. To say i assumed that you turned your back would mean I did not provide you with an option B.

I have been answering questions from atheist for a while now. And, while you might still believe your a snow flake wrapped in an enigma. There is nothing you have said or done here that would indicate you have anything new. Matter of fact the 'you don't know me' spiell is atheism 101. Once you've learn to hate God properly you will graduate from the unique snow flake mentality to aligning yourself with a voltaire, nietzsche, or a dawkins of some type. Why? Because you will grow to understand that it is only under one of these 'preordained' philosphies will your thoughts find any traction. That's not to say for a while you might think your views are your own, but if you begin to read the works of some of the better known miso theists you will find out, all that makes you a unique snow flake has already been published by one of these guys, and if you keep reading they have already been refuted as well.

But hey, for shits and giggles let's say the Holy Spirit gave me Proof of God and I turned my back on it. Wouldn't that be a failure on the part of the message if it wasn't enough for me at that point in my life to accept it?

Why would you assume that 'proof' would come in the form of a message?

Shouldn't God know I would find some aspect of it disagreeable to the point of rebellion? I would posit that whatever God's message it must be pretty lousy if even Angels, beings created perfect, IN paradise, face to face with God chose to rebel against him.

which is why i gave option 1 "That, God gave you proof and you turned your back on it." That is also why i said, 'at that point you could no longer call yourself an atheist.' (Meaning one who does not believe in God) If you have proof of God you can't say you do not believe in Him. No rather if you have proof and turn your back, it is because you find God disagreeable (Just as you said yourself) which makes you a misotheist.

(See I have already been here with one/many of you snow flakes. I gave you your answer before you even knew to ask the question)

Are you fucking kidding me? Logic and Reasoning =\= Making up your opponents view for them and then making sweeping assumptions about an infinitely diverse group of people. All you've done is shown yourself to be a bit of an arrogant prick that assumes he knows all the answers. That in itself is bad form but you also failed to address my point. There are 41,000+ denominations of Christianity and many of them can and do disagree with you. Your 'whipping' technique is laughable.

(All good things come to those who wait.)

You said something funny: "An infinatly diverse group" What you dont seem to get is all of you claim to believe one thing. In that one belief it can be boiled down to one of two reason to label one's self an "Atheist." (really just one)
Allow me to demonstrate, First lets define the words we are using:

a·the·ist
ˈāTHēˌist/Submit
noun
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
"he is a committed atheist"
(from a simple 'define atheist' google search)

Next, Lets look at the defination a person who disbelieves or lacks belief.

Now lets define belief the same way:
be·lief
biˈlēf/Submit
noun
1.
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
"his belief in the value of hard work"
something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction.
"contrary to popular belief, Aramaic is a living language"
synonyms: opinion, view, conviction, judgment, thinking, way of thinking, idea, impression, theory, conclusion, notion
"it's my belief that age is irrelevant"
a religious conviction.
"Christian beliefs"
synonyms: ideology, principle, ethic, tenet, canon; More


Meaning, If you have proof of something, and if one is bound by any sense of logic then belief must follow. So in order to say you are an Atheist you are saying you have no belief in God. As proof fosters belief, and if you have no belief, then one can say you have no proof.

Hence option 2. God has not support your 'infinatly diverse groups' beliefs in Him just as Jesus said He wouldn't in the parable of the foolish builder.
Why? because again you/we all have our own pictures of God, and we must learn to let them go, and seek God for who he is. Not who we think Him to be.

If God can't turn into a woman than he isn't all powerful. Hell, I find a being with the powers described of It having a gender at all to be hilarious and it simply smacks of Bronze Age tribesman logic.

Also, does It's "mysterious ways" have limits or something? Basic logic and reasoning would say that an All Powerful being can do anything.

Again, WE Describe God as all powerful, based on How God describes Himself. "The Great I am, The Alpha and Omega" If you can get past the desire to post a Meme of popeye, and look to the meaning of those words. You will find that God is and does what ever He wants to be/do. As the bible refers to Him as a him, and that He takes the role as a Father that would mean he was male.

As a Follower of the God of the bible I do not care what gender He assigns Himself. I was told to look for a Him, and that is what I will do.

Two reasons come to mind right away Psalm 23 more over the bit where "God leads us not into temptation and He delivers us from evil.." and the Story of the prodigal son/gay daughter (in this case.) In the story the father did not take the son and show him how the best ways to party. He simply let Him go to do what suited him, and waited for his return.

If your gay it's because that is what suits you. when you want to return home then know your Father has made perperations for you to be able to do that.

I disagree with this in multiple ways.

Firstly, Adam and Eve. Put a young child in a room with a box and tell them not to look at what's inside it and then leave the room. The vast majority of the time they're going to look in the box because you created the idea that there was something interesting inside it. This is temptation. Substitute the Tree of Knowledge (Stupidly, the one thing they would need to know what they were doing is wrong in the first place) and voila, God providing temptation. If you want to say it was the Serpent that did the tempting then God either:

A) Let it happen. in which case he's not all loving because he cursed us all for it.
B) Couldn't stop it from happening. In which case he's neither all powerful or all loving because he cursed us all for it.
C) Didn't know it was happening. (He does lose track of Adam in the Garden at one point so...) In which case he lacks all three divine properties.

What are the three divine properties and where are they found in the bible labeled as such?

A is your answer.. Now all you have to do is find BCV that say God is supposed to be 'All Loving.' Or conceed that this is your own version of god that failed to get supported.

Second way I disagree is that I was born like this.

Join the club We were ALL BORN UNTO SIN. You are nothing special. That is why Christ came and died for us.

I have never desired a man physically or emotionally, and even more telling is that the smell of a man's sweat, despite years of prolonged exposure at work, makes me sick to my stomach.

Yeah, me too. That is one of the reason we moved our shop into an A/C building.

Not being metaphorical here, it literally makes me feel ill.

So am I. you should smell what 10 guys with swap butt smells like after 10 hours in 100% humidity. Even our brake room reeked of it.

Even if I did "want to come home" as you so eloquently put 'bang dudes', I simply could not and to force myself to do so would be my literal Hell on Earth.

ah, no. Come home simply means owning your sin and seeking forgiveness for them. 'Banging' anyone is not a requirement.

I'm definitely not gay because it suits me, Lesbianism IS my normal and I've seen Christian interpretations of these so called "preparations" for this like "pray the gay away" clinics that lead many people, especially teenagers, to deeper depression and suicide.

So the same can be said about hertrosexual sex. Even so not all hetrosexual sex is without sin just because one of each sex is being repersented.

Again, there are tons of Christians that have completely different views than you.

Indeed. There are even more non believers who have different views. I honestly don't care for any of them unless they seek a relationship with the God of the bible.

Honestly, good for you. Takes a lot of open mindedness to take steps like that. Hell, a lot of Christians would regard that as a slippery slope to a sinful life. Now just take a few more steps and it'll be even better. ^_^

My journey has ended because I have found what it is i have been looking for. Now I seek to grow in what i have found and help others get to where I am at.

Dodging the point I was making. God was tearing shit up all the time, now all we get is the occasional appearance on toast or a leaky wall or some other thing that can always be attributed to chance.

That's just it. Those who don't have God, get nothing just as you said. Those who do, get to see God work every day.

You do not seem to be aware of what the book of Judges is about.
Everything in Judges 1&2 is about the punishment of Israel. Both book catalog a cycle of sin, punishment in the way of God handing the jews over to their enemies, the jews repenting, God delivering them, and the process repeating over and over each time getting worse and worse.

So an example in Judges 1 would be an example of God handing the jews over to their enemies.

Who is to say this is not happening now?

Again assuming everybody interprets every book of the bible the same...

Ah, no. Not the book of judges as that book tells us with in the pages that what is being described is God's judgement, punishment and deliverance again, and again and again. Each time getting worse.

The books of judges are identified which they obviously don't given the 41,000+ denominations of Christianity. Are you telling me that I can't read a passage stating that God took part in battle (whether in person or in spirit) and lost to superior weaponry and read it for what it is? Given that I think the Bible was written by and for Bronze Age tribesman it makes perfect sense to me that a highly advanced weapon would instill this kind of response in the writer.

No you can not read the bible out of context and ascribe your own meaning and still be refering to the God of the bible..

That is like reading a Spiderman comic and then start to tell your own version of what was read changing whatever you like to bend who Marvel said Spiderman was, to suit your own picture of him. Soceity has a name for that now. It's fan fiction. If you take passages out of context to build your version of God (one that can't stand up to iron charriots, but is all loving, and has changed Himself into a woman but still calls himself Father) Then what you have done is no different. You have created a fan fiction version of God. Christ refers to this as building your house on the sand. Meaning when your fan fiction version of God is tested by the trials of life it falls flat on its face.

The idea of people "Seeking the God of the Bible, whatever the outcome." seems to go out the window if it doesn't agree with your specific point of view. I seek, I find only old stories written by barbarians with little understanding of the world and universe.

Now just for arguement lets say I have indeed found God, and He has blessed me beyond what I deserve. Which would also mean I know him well and can see him and recognise him in others. Now lets say someone comes to me with a fan fiction version. What do you think my response would be when the fan fiction version is being held up like the God i know, who has richly blessed me?

Or perhaps God never existed in the first place and the stories are just stories. Given that I can prove huge chunks of the bible as factually inaccurate with simply science and study of history...

A great many have tried here on this website, and have failed (that is why you stand a lone with me) If you want to try start a new thread, and lets test what it is you think you know... Oh, and if you are thinking of posting a link to the skeptics 'antiquated' bible, I will just post a link to the skeptics 'antiquated' bible Answered.

Or as so called miracles which many, many, MANY Christians love to point to as evidence of the Divine. Hence my point. If God was actually sending them then his production values have shrunk immensely.

as being a recipient of said miracle i see it differently. What I see is back then people were looking for God and reveled when he showed up. Now People hate and fear God and desperately seek to bury and hide Him when ever He is made known.

For the Bible based Christian it is not the reward. Heaven for the Bible Based Christian is simply a venue, where our most precious commodities are common place building materials. Your think of catholisim or Muslim beliefs in the after life.

No True Scotsman!

Bold should read "My incredibly specific set of beliefs based on my personal interpretations of the Bible" You assume all Christians who base their faith in the Bible are like you and you couldn't be more wrong. Like I said, 41,000+ different denominations, many of which condemn many of the others.

Also, if you think every single solitary "Bible based Christian" isn't motivated by reward then you just don't know people.[/quote]There is only one qualification in what I have said. bible believing Christ. Meaning one has to have the bible at the center of their beliefs. Catholics have the pope at their center and muslims have the Koran. Therefore by literal definations those two groups are not bible biblically based.

Feeling's mutual. There's always a book or verse that contradicts what's being said.

then show me.

In which case separating the two, venue (heaven) and reward (relationship with God), is just an arbitrary action in order to put you on a pedestal above other religions and one of the worst cases of Special Pleading I've ever seen. You're damn well doing it for a reward, you just think yours is special. This desperation to elevate yourself above other faiths is so petty and lacking in humility that it's honestly disappointing.

If I tell you I have a billion dollars to give out as a reward for one who can do XYZ. Verses I am giving out my love and respect to the person who can give their life in my service, which is considered a trifle and which is considered a proper reward?

Can you even accept that the 'reward' other people spend their entire life seeking means just as much to them as yours does to you? I'm honestly asking here!

If one seeks love and respect from His Heavenly Father nothing else given will matter.

All I seek is the "well done my Good and faithful servant, you are welcome into my Fathers Rest." Christ promises us.

Personally I don't think people deserve to be TORTURED FOREVER for disagreeing with me.

Tomato/Toe-matto. Oh, and maybe the forever in Hell thing is not apart of a biblically based view of what God has in store for those who are sentenced there.

Unless you can find some BCV that actually supports what you think.

If you want to save some time I can accuratly tell you no where in scripture does it say 'we/man will burn in Hell forever.'[/quote] It says Hell is forever and that satan and his angels are slated to burn their forever... But, for us Hell is our sheol, our second death, our grave. We are to be consumed by the fires like the tares/weeds.

Even more so if the method I used to try and convince them was an ancient collection of Bronze Age myths, riddled with easily disprovable facts and events, delivered by groups of people so mired with greed, corruption, and petty hate for one another that they often appear so much worse than the people they condemn.

Sadly, I don't think we can be friends because of this. I've seen an ugliness in you through this group of responses. A petty and vindictive nature that has been absent from the decent Christians I've befriended throughout my life. Altogether disappointing.

Good newws everyone! We can not be friends for a whole lot of reasons, except for the ones you listed.

---

Drich, some pages ago you wrote that you don't think the Bible is infallible. Yet, how can your knowledge of god be regarded as correct if the bible is not infallible? Also since you proclaim yourself to be a "Bible-believing Christian"®?

Even ASKing is something you ultimately get from the Bible. Where is the objective proof that Luke 11 is one of the good parts and not one of the fallible ones? If you say that's because you ASKed and he delivered,well that's not going to be objective evidence as ASKing only takes place in your mind. You ARE going to be subject to confirmation bias; after all you're a human too.

Only God is perfect, only God is Good.

We know the bible is accurate because in the bible their are promises. If one does XYZ he will get 123. I know the bible is accurate because the one perfect and good God has kept His end of the deal after i kept mine.

[Anomalocaris]

Hi, I'm new.

Just read this entire thread, exhausting. I was wondering if any one else noticed that Drich seems to take sport in this. From the smug one liners and liberal use of emoticons it appears to be entertaining him. Anyone else get this impression?

Acting smug is the tool he uses to avoid confronting either his own stupidity, or the inability of his creed to help him disguise his stupidity from his fellow men.

It's the classical Christianity. Throw a bunch of idiotic shit, than chant victory while sidling off the stage. The difference with drippy is he is even more stupid than usual and doesn't know when to sidle off the stage.